ITAT deletes addition of unaccounted receipts based on paper found in drawer, allows professional fees with proper banking evidence

ITAT Mumbai-AT allowed the assessee's appeal in two matters. First, the addition of unaccounted receipts based solely on a paper found in director's drawer containing flat sale details was deleted, as the AO lacked credible material and improperly relied on assumptions without proper evidence. Second, disallowance of professional fees was reversed since the assessee discharged its burden by proving payments were made through banking channels with TDS deduction for loan negotiation services, and the assessee cannot be penalized for recipients' failure to respond to AO's notices.

---

---

Issues Involved:

1. Addition of alleged unaccounted income based on a piece of paper found during a survey.
2. Disallowance of professional fees claimed by the assessee.

Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

1. Addition of Alleged Unaccounted Income:

The primary issue revolves around the addition of unaccounted income based on a piece of paper found during a survey operation conducted under section 133A of the Income Tax Act. This paper, found in the drawer of a director, contained details of the sale of five flats, including both cheque and cash payments. The Assessing Officer (AO) observed that only cheque payments were recorded in the books, leading to the presumption that the cash payments represented undisclosed income. The assessee contested this, stating that the mentioned flats were not ultimately purchased by the individuals listed on the paper.

The AO proceeded to estimate unaccounted receipts for 40 flats by comparing the agreement value with a grossed-up ready reckoner value, resulting in an addition of Rs. 7,73,15,067/- to the assessee's income. However, the CIT(A) held that only the profit element of the unaccounted sale consideration should be assessed, reducing the addition to Rs. 1,93,59,693/-.

Upon appeal, the Tribunal found that the piece of paper could not be considered credible evidence for the following reasons:
- The contents of the paper were not accepted by the assessee or its directors.
- There was no corroborative material provided by the AO to support the entries on the paper.
- The individuals listed did not purchase the flats, negating the presumption of cash receipt.
- Each sale was a separate contract, negotiated individually, with no basis to assume a consistent pattern of cash receipt.

The Tribunal also noted that the AO's inquiries with some buyers did not yield adverse findings, and no evidence was presented to show that buyers paid cash over the agreement value. The Tribunal referenced judicial precedents which emphasized the need for credible evidence to support additions for unaccounted income. Consequently, the Tribunal concluded that the AO lacked credible material to justify the addition of Rs. 7,73,15,067/- and directed its deletion, rendering the profit estimation by CIT(A) irrelevant.

2. Disallowance of Professional Fees:

The second issue concerns the disallowance of professional fees amounting to Rs. 27,25,000/-, paid to two individuals for arranging debt funding. The AO disallowed this expense, citing the lack of response from the recipients to notices and their failure to file returns of income. The CIT(A) upheld this disallowance.

The Tribunal, however, found that the assessee had adequately demonstrated the purpose of the professional fees, supported by bills and payment through banking channels with TDS deducted. The financial statements corroborated the need for professional services, as the assessee secured a significant loan from PNB Housing Finance during the relevant year. The Tribunal emphasized that the failure of the recipients to respond to notices or file returns should not penalize the assessee, especially when the professional fees were paid for legitimate business purposes. The Tribunal concluded that the AO was unjustified in disallowing the professional fees and directed its deletion.

Conclusion:

The Tribunal allowed the appeal of the assessee, deleting both the addition of unaccounted income and the disallowance of professional fees, while dismissing the appeal of the revenue. The judgment underscores the necessity for credible evidence and corroboration in tax assessments, particularly concerning unaccounted income and business expenses.

---